tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post4207589495996904665..comments2023-05-01T20:05:15.156+08:00Comments on The 101st Galleria Regulars: When your transport blows up...Salubrihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14947226213955912383noreply@blogger.comBlogger29125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-15773443776457196422008-11-06T17:11:00.000+08:002008-11-06T17:11:00.000+08:00by the way - Any games on saturday? Henriby the way - Any games on saturday? <BR/><BR/>Henrihenrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01395559021991010165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-20693720262852913012008-11-06T17:09:00.000+08:002008-11-06T17:09:00.000+08:00Sirs Well I hope we get the answer soon- for me I ...Sirs <BR/><BR/>Well I hope we get the answer soon- for me I dont mind - Which ever is correct. . . <BR/> <BR/>I hope no offences taken from players opinions - no bad feelings - Rules are to keep teh game on standard it should not keep us from having fun. . . (you may kiss and make up)hehheheh joking around!!! :D<BR/><BR/><BR/>My opinion :<BR/>but again as I stated I agree with midnight's arguments - but to make the game easier to play I have vote for Salubri (game play wise). It is based on how I interpret the game rules- not that i agree with its logic. Honestly I would rather declare my charges on the shooting phase as to eliminate the pot shots and unfair tactics of charging on the game (real life they fire at the same time-so targets are chosen before hand- including the charges ):D . . . <BR/><BR/>Again just to make the game play faster in future games :D ( so I dont have to roll a dice before every game - But Logic does tell me Midnight has a good point - )henrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01395559021991010165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-11770109505341305862008-11-06T10:52:00.000+08:002008-11-06T10:52:00.000+08:00agreed. i'm sorry if i sound arrogant at times. ...agreed. i'm sorry if i sound arrogant at times. bravado lang yun. pabiro lang. <BR/><BR/>:D<BR/><BR/>and yes don't vote for me. vote for the topic. this isn't ronald vs ryan. just one interpretation vs the other.Salubrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14947226213955912383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-53773229717242645362008-11-06T10:45:00.000+08:002008-11-06T10:45:00.000+08:00my vote is yes, not to ryan (hehe) but to the... w...my vote is yes, not to ryan (hehe) but to the... whatever it is we are voting on.<BR/><BR/>Let me just clarify that the vote is not to decide who is right, or more right than the other. Fact is either one of us, or all of us for that matter, can be wrong. <BR/><BR/>This thing we are talking about is a gray area, which can be interpreted either way, as I have mentioned so many number of times in all my posts. At this point, in the absence of an FAQ that addressed this, I am inclined to interpret in one way, to which I will not force anyone to accept, coz I am not Lord and Master, contrary to what my callsign implies. In time (salubri wrote to the GW roolsboys), when my interpretation turns out to be wrong, I will say oooppps and accept the congratulatory hits at the back of my head with grace.<BR/><BR/>My vote is neither biased, given that I have 3 armies with lots of transports and 3 armies with no tranports... couldn't care less which wins.<BR/><BR/>Guys, dudes, countrymen, old men with toys... we are not in congress... we are playing a game. If you come across another gray area next time, roll the dice during the game to decide and then discuss later and get the consensus of the majority. Make "negotiations" easy... we are not negotiating for nuclear disarmament here. <BR/><BR/>Lastly, it is not worth blowing away friendships because of rules disputes about a game.<BR/><BR/>May the force be with you... always.Balian the Blacksmithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00376699341267307439noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-20392001863810393412008-11-05T21:25:00.000+08:002008-11-05T21:25:00.000+08:00what i said still stands, decide what you guys wan...what i said still stands, decide what you guys want. but if we are playing here, it's not allowed.<BR/><BR/>i don't buy it.high noonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16859755447455852096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-41616073465974242942008-11-05T21:24:00.000+08:002008-11-05T21:24:00.000+08:00I vote yes to Ryan.I vote yes to Ryan.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-91877406968900155902008-11-05T13:55:00.000+08:002008-11-05T13:55:00.000+08:00if the rest of you guys are still not convinced wi...if the rest of you guys are still not convinced with the arguments i've given then i'm still open to a consensus. <BR/><BR/>i will abide by whatever the rest of the group decides. <BR/><BR/>but in case you want me to explain my point further we can do it when we meet(i can explain it more visually that way). it's really just a matter of elementary english. whether literal or in the spirit of the law emcee and i are right.<BR/><BR/>:DSalubrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14947226213955912383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-24638624211335804152008-11-05T11:51:00.000+08:002008-11-05T11:51:00.000+08:00sorry. i'm not voting on this. if you guys want to...sorry. i'm not voting on this. if you guys want to play at the house, then i will stand pat on it. if we play in galle, then use your consensus. nuff said.high noonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16859755447455852096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-16593703941187512222008-11-05T09:26:00.000+08:002008-11-05T09:26:00.000+08:00VOTES CASTED: Issue if you blew up the Transport. ...VOTES CASTED: <BR/>Issue if you blew up the Transport. . . : <BR/><BR/>Salubri <BR/>Yes: 2<BR/>- Henri <BR/><BR/>Midnight <BR/>No: 1henrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01395559021991010165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-31887122793806053292008-11-05T09:25:00.000+08:002008-11-05T09:25:00.000+08:00what the hell!? first you disagreed with me then y...what the hell!? first you disagreed with me then you voted "yes". lol<BR/><BR/>make up your mind. :P ano ba talaga?Salubrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14947226213955912383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-57430690707032919552008-11-05T09:24:00.000+08:002008-11-05T09:24:00.000+08:00we can reach a quorum without the votes of sigis, ...we can reach a quorum without the votes of sigis, kim, alfred(though this might be two votes! lol) and lesther. they hardly ever check this blog me thinks. but if they suddenly vote on the issue then those votes will also count.<BR/><BR/>so the votes that we need will be those of:<BR/>ronald, emcee, ryan, romy, henri, mike, joel, ian. <BR/><BR/>8... if we're deadlocked we maintain status quo (only unit that blew up transport may assault..)Salubrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14947226213955912383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-35712877760920985062008-11-05T09:23:00.000+08:002008-11-05T09:23:00.000+08:00Vote pala : hehehe :YES - same sa Ryan - - - ...Vote pala : hehehe :<BR/>YES - same sa Ryan <BR/>- - - - - - - - - - <BR/>Has nothig to do with what i Think but to make the rules simple :D <BR/><BR/>Henrihenrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01395559021991010165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-20158427070384408022008-11-05T09:03:00.001+08:002008-11-05T09:03:00.001+08:00If its time to vote: My vote is the shooter that ...If its time to vote: <BR/>My vote is the shooter that blows up the apc/transport gets the charge!!! <BR/>any shooters before it blew up doesnt get to charge it. . . So only units that have not shot it can shoot and charge the passengers :D <BR/>So no pot shots schemes. . . :D <BR/>SIDE NOTES Lang:<BR/>Unless one decleares it is going to charge it after the shooting phase(parang fantacy rules)<BR/>just my view ...henrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01395559021991010165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-33186817239979602632008-11-05T09:03:00.000+08:002008-11-05T09:03:00.000+08:00Yes - multiple units that shot at the transport th...Yes - multiple units that shot at the transport that blew up may assault disembarked passengers.<BR/><BR/>No - only the unit that blew up the transport may assault the disembarked passengers.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Obviously my vote is "Yes"<BR/><BR/>-------------<BR/><BR/>every other member of the group should also vote on this matter and the consensus whatever it may be is what we apply to our games.Salubrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14947226213955912383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-19112247136276480592008-11-05T08:57:00.000+08:002008-11-05T08:57:00.000+08:00Ok so what is the verdict? It does make a differen...Ok so what is the verdict? <BR/>It does make a difference on games. . . :D<BR/>The rules are a bit confusing now. . . hehehe <BR/><BR/>Can we(players) just Vote on it? Put all the arguments into the open then close it with the players consensus. (say for 1 week) This then becomes our rule on all games played unless GW releases a FAQ on it :D <BR/><BR/>Points are too close to call- :D<BR/>This is the other fun thing about our 40k gaming - learning the rules :)henrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01395559021991010165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-56855105940574199162008-11-05T08:53:00.000+08:002008-11-05T08:53:00.000+08:00This comment has been removed by the author.henrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01395559021991010165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-4873983811842661562008-11-05T08:49:00.000+08:002008-11-05T08:49:00.000+08:00This comment has been removed by the author.henrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01395559021991010165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-21944063001115527382008-11-04T21:38:00.000+08:002008-11-04T21:38:00.000+08:00This comment has been removed by the author.high noonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16859755447455852096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-81623238931373876632008-11-04T10:02:00.000+08:002008-11-04T10:02:00.000+08:00the roolz boyz have blinked out of internet existe...the roolz boyz have blinked out of internet existence. GW now wants you to spend dollars to contact their rules expert by phone. :DSalubrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14947226213955912383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-64994512509301778972008-11-04T09:59:00.000+08:002008-11-04T09:59:00.000+08:00or someone can email GW... that's what alfred does...or someone can email GW... that's what alfred does :D<BR/><BR/>In the meantime, do what the rulebook says in case of disputes in interpretation... roll the diceBalian the Blacksmithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00376699341267307439noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-67878562326423327062008-11-04T09:30:00.000+08:002008-11-04T09:30:00.000+08:00frak it! can someone get commissar alfred in here...frak it! can someone get commissar alfred in here? we have a real life lawyer in this group. lolSalubrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14947226213955912383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-33336844003497319812008-11-04T09:18:00.000+08:002008-11-04T09:18:00.000+08:00October 2008 FAQ for 5th ed rulebook:Q. Must passe...<B>October 2008 FAQ for 5th ed rulebook:</B><BR/><BR/>Q. Must passengers fire at the same target that<BR/>their vehicle is firing at?<BR/>A. No, they are a separate unit <B>(albeit they are<BR/>temporarily co-existing with the vehicle)</B> and so<BR/>can fire at a different target.<BR/><BR/>like i said. that is the spirit of the law. the transport and it's passengers are one target (even if they are different units). maybe this will convince some of you or maybe it won't. i won't even try to explain as it is just as hard to grasp for most people as 1 God in 3 persons. :D<BR/><BR/>in any case i want to state that i'm not arguing for my own benefit. we will run tourneys in the future and we have to settle these things hopefully amongst ourselves without asking for outside help unless it's necessary (why i haven't posted these on any other forums). what is important is we reach a consensus(hopefully the right one) so we apply the unified ruling and not be inconsistent. <BR/><BR/>personally either way works for me as long as I know the ruling before playing(and that it doesn't change with every opponent). makes for less surprises. :)Salubrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14947226213955912383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-43795066952800525152008-11-03T19:49:00.000+08:002008-11-03T19:49:00.000+08:00for me, if the intent was to let all units that sh...for me, if the intent was to let all units that shot at a transport the opportunity to assault the disembarked passengers, the wording would have been<BR/><BR/>if a transport is destroyed by a ranged attack, then all units that shot at it may assault...<BR/><BR/>if you recall, the example given was 1 unit. it did not mention multiple units shooting at the same target. hence, i would argue that it is only that the intent is to clarify for that 1 unit only.high noonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16859755447455852096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-678063238206486102008-11-03T17:49:00.000+08:002008-11-03T17:49:00.000+08:00My take is that current wording just gives the con...My take is that current wording just gives the conditions <BR/>- "if a transport is destroyed by a range attack"<BR/>- "unit that shot it..."<BR/><BR/>It is not clear with the current wordings if the range attack that destroyed the transport should also have come from the unit that intends to assault the resulting disembarked passengers.<BR/><BR/>As the rule is written, you just have to ask 1) if the tranport was destroyed by a range attack and 2) did assaulting unit shoot at the transport. If the answer to both is yes, then I say the unit can assault the disembarked passengers.<BR/><BR/>I can also argue the other way around, but for me to do that I will have to go use the "intention of the rule" as trump card... since I can't testify in behalf of GW, that would be a line of argument I wouldn't take. Only an FAQ from GW will be enough. <BR/><BR/>My gut feel is that the intention was that the range attack from the unit should have been the one that destroyed the transport. Sadly, the wordings used is pretty much open to interpretation at best. If I was to reword that bit of rule, I would have said "However, if a transport is destroyed by a range attack, the unit that shot and destroyed it may assault the now disembarked passengers".<BR/><BR/>I say roll the dice if you walk into the same situation. <BR/><BR/>I am also saying ahead that if I was jusdging a tourney,in absence of an FAQ or further enlightenment, I would rule that unit can assault disembarked passengers. Also, also... I promise I would be consistent with said ruling even if I am the one on the receiving end of the impending assault of doom. :P <BR/><BR/>PS - excuse me for the "lawyering"... I do it for a living (even if I am not a lawyer). Please note that I can also argue contrary to what I just said. Hehe.Balian the Blacksmithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00376699341267307439noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19504668.post-62172032611138522372008-11-03T17:41:00.000+08:002008-11-03T17:41:00.000+08:00for people who are new to the game, it may seem li...for people who are new to the game, it may seem like a jolly good thing to consider that the transport and unit inside are one and the same. so they could say, i can shoot the vehicle with my tank killing weapon and then the troops with my bolt pistols/bolters/etc. once they disembark. <BR/><BR/>that's why i think GW wrote that clarification - NO you can't shoot the disembarked troops with your other weapons. However, if you do destroy the transport, the unit can NOW assault the disembarked passengers and not sit on your ass and wait for the next turn.high noonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16859755447455852096noreply@blogger.com